This is entirely a political matter as India doesn't wants VVIP helicopter deal to come out in public as it would be a huge embarrassment for the ruling cong party with the election scheduled the next year. they have tried to use this time by asking from ITALY to return the submarines very rudely I would say which Indian govt doesn't even replies to Pakistan this way.
so what i get a feel sitting here that the case is being taken to advantage by ruling party so that they can escape some face which seems to have blackened for last 4 years due to scams and may be this allows Italy not share details about the VVIP defense deal.

That was 90 years ago during the fascist regime! Since 1945 Italy is a democratic republic who apologized for colonialism, and do so much earlier then other european colonialist countries who tried to kept their colonies for years! What kind of nationalistic excitment are you living in? We are not happy that our soldiers are shooting at fishermans, and we are not proud of our past colonialism. We are indeed relieve that, thank God, it was only a 3rd rate one and not a 1st rate one! That would have meant that our ancestors would have done more damages then the ones they were able to do. Live in the present and deal with the present, it is already complicated enough.

Ok, just asking, but why don't both countries just utilize the ICJ or the ICC to artbitrate since neither side wants to play fair, but however still wants to play the "politically correct" game of what's diplomatically sound. You can't have your cake and eat it too! If you foul up, other nations will see and note for future reference in dealings with your government. Intl law is obscure and ambiguous at best, so how about taking a step back, and letting a fresh pair of hands figure if the juice is worth the squeeze before squeezing it.

Italy is setting up the precedence.
A sovereign government dis-honored its voluntary sworn affidavit in another country's supreme court!
ICC/ICJ/Marines/Jurisdiction - these are all secondary/non-issues now.
Diplomacy demands a certain level of trust and if governments start lying and dis-honoring their promises then there is no point in having "Diplomatic Relationships".
What is the guarantee that Italy will honor ICC/ICJ judgment? Why should any country trust Italy?

Restore status quo ante ie, bring the marines back to India and then either bilaterally negotiate about territoriality and jurisdiction or take the case to ICJ for arbitration but do not use crude deceit as a statecraft.

There is clear contempt of court in a matter the Ambassador initiated legal involvement by entering a sworn affidavit. Personally he is in a hapless situation but it is astonishing that a responsible government can allow its ambassador to either willfully use deceit on its behalf with clear intent to dishonour its pledge.

According to this [http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-2295400/Anger-Delhi-Italy-insists-Indian-authority-envoy-Capital.html?ito=feeds-newsxml] other EU countries are quite upset with Italy and it does strengthen the traditional stereotype of Itsalians that they are generally untrustworthy.

Restore status quo ante ie, bring the marines back to India and then either bilaterally negotiate about territoriality and jurisdiction or take the case to ICJ for arbitration but do not use crude deceit as a statecraft.
There is clear contempt of court in a matter the Ambassador initiated legal involvement by entering a sworn affidavit. Personally he is in a hapless situation but it is astonishing that a responsible government can allow its ambassador to willfully use deceit on its behalf with clear intent to dishonour its pledge.
According to this [http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-2295400/Anger-Delhi-Italy-insists-Indian-authority-envoy-Capital.html?ito=feeds-newsxml] other EU countries are quite upset with Italy and it does strengthen the traditional stereotype of Italians, perhaps wrongly and unfairly, that they are generally untrustworthy.

You have a point, however, who is to determine the correct course of action based on one country's predetermination of guilt? Yes the Marines should receive a trial, and in my opinion the Ambasssador should not be cleared of fault either; in a sense I think he exercised his own diplomatic course of action, that may or may not been in accordance with his govenment's, which I'm sure is also punishable and exhonrates him from diplmatic immunity. If Italy was wise, they would take action on the ambassador, adhere to an ICJ verdict, and put to ease the minds of surrounding governments who have lost faith in Italian politics.

We need to respect Our citizen's life more than anythig. Italy should understand, if someone carries a gun, it does not mean they can use it at everyone. Looks like the Marines were very badly trained, and were under liquor consumption, or there was no supervision on them. Any ways they have to pay the price. They need to offer huge compensation to settle the matter, and the all the compensation should go to the Fishermen who were killed.

Why were they sent to Italy for Voting ? It is ridiculous. They can do absentee ballots. It is also some carelessness on our part as well. Like they say prevention is better than cure, so we need to be careful before granting bail in such cases. Also he could have celebrated Christmas in their embassy. Why do they need to go home when they committed a crime ? We need to tighten our belt but deal in polite but firm manner.

1) "Liquor consumption" is something common to northern European countries. Alcoholism is very rare in Italy - no, there is no evidence of liquor consumption, just bad judgement.

2) "No supervision". Exactly. This is the controversial part - putting only two soldiers aboard a ship? Not a very good idea in the end.

3) Compensation - Perhaps inevitable. I think that neither in Italy nor in India is it common to award large compensation settlements. Both our cultures find this very American solution a bit insulting in the face of death.

4) We do not have absentee ballots in Italy. For a ten-day period before and after elections, train tickets are available at a 70% discount to go back home to vote if you are working/temporarily domiciled somewhere other than your place of residence.
If you are "permanently" residing abroad, you are registered through the embassy or local consul, but that was not the case of the arrested marines.

In any case, I find the article quite well written. This ugly matter has just got worse thanks to government incompetence. Relations between our two great countries, always excellent, should not be allowed to worsen over the incompetence of two soldiers and a number of military and government officials - perhaps on both sides.

There's a good deal of racism in some of these comments. I suspect that the tone would be quite different had the marines been German, British or Swedish, just to make some examples: after all, Nordics can not be wrong, right? The United States refused to hand over to Italy the soldier who killed a member of the Italian intelligence service while the latter was escorting an Italian journalist released by her kidnappers in Iraq, along with two aircraft pilots who killed 39 people in the Italian Alps by cutting a cablecar wire while piloting their planes; but then it is us Italians who can never be trusted, right?
And so we deserve to be tramped upon, right or wrong.

If Italian government dis-honors it's voluntary sworn affidavit, why should it be trusted?
Indian government allowed the marines in question to return home for christmas as well as for easter. And Italian government paid back by cheating. You tell me, who is to blame if no one ever trusts Italians!

India needs to stand firm on this matter. It's ridiculous that Europeans should cause murder and mayhem on Indian soil (or in Indian waters) and then be allowed to abscond. If it comes to trade boycotts, so be it. The Indian economy is much less export-oriented than the EU's. More important, this is a matter of national sovereignty for India.

They were in international waters 12 nautical miles from india's territorial waters. This is recognised as India's exclusive economic zone. Moreover, the crime took place on an Indian boat where Indian citizens were killed. The international waters = international courts rule applies only to incidents of navigation, and this does to qualify as one as Italians would like. India has jurisdiction on the matter and by voluntarily submitting a sworn affidavit in the highest court of India, the Italian ambassador and his country have submitted to its jurisdiction. No diplomatic immunity applies and he should be charged with contempt of court and punished if Marines don't return.

Says who? The Italian media? Gimme a break. I have been following the Italian media reports on the matter and it is nothing but biased. The shooting occurred in Indian Territorial waters,within the Indian contiguous zone.
The Italians lied to the Indian Supreme Court and to the Indian government. Like hell the two marines will stand trial in Italy for their crimes. The Italians refused to accept the Indian legal system. The system is slow, but it is fair and with competent judges. No Indian court willfully or as a judgement subscribes to any violations in human rights. There are no human rights abuses within the Indian legal system. For heavens sake, the marines were put up in a 3-star government guest house with an Italian chef.
I didn't realize the EU 'human rights' commission protected criminal cowards with such impunity. Not a word from them about the two fishermen killed. Didn't they have a right to live? But of course, all human rights are only rights as long as your own is protected. The marines,sir, and their whole breed are a bunch of racists.

What international court? There are hardly any, and none that have jurisdiction over this matter. This is one of the many problems of international law, an area governed by non-universal agreements and "state practice" but jurisdiction over ships in international waters is well settled and has been for over 100 years.

The deaths occurred on an Indian vessel. Acts on that vessel would be under Indian jurisdiction as they were the flag state. By the same token, acts on the Italian registered ship are under Italian jurisdiction. Criminal liability attaches to an act, an omission or to a status. They did acts on the Italian ship, Italy has jurisdiction.

There are three types of jurisdiction over the sea. Well there are four, but we can safely ignore the continental shelf. Territorial waters, contiguous zone and EEZ. In your territorial waters you more or less make the rules, subject to rules about innocent navigation. In the contiguous zone you have some limited jurisdiction to enforce sanitary laws etc. In the EEZ you have fishing rights. In the contiguous zone you do not have jurisdiction over vessels of another state as regards incidents such as this.

It seems a little ironic to generalise about an "entire breed" of people by denouncing them as racists.

Not 12 darling...much more "According to the Indian Coast Guard, Indian government sources and the crew of the fishing boat Saint Antony, the incident occurred at approximately 16:30 IST (11:00 UTC) on 15 February 2012, when the fishing boat was returning from a fishing expedition and happened within the Indian Contiguous Zone around 20.5 nautical miles off the coast of Kerala."

And also, this is an incident of navigation because the marines shot at what they believed were pirates. The fact they turn up to be fishermen is immaterial.

Not 12 darling...much more "According to the Indian Coast Guard, Indian government sources and the crew of the fishing boat Saint Antony, the incident occurred at approximately 16:30 IST (11:00 UTC) on 15 February 2012, when the fishing boat was returning from a fishing expedition and happened within the Indian Contiguous Zone around 20.5 nautical miles off the coast of Kerala."

And also, this is an incident of navigation because the marines shot at what they believed were pirates. The fact they turn up to be fishermen is immaterial.

It certainly is an ugly situation mis-managed by both sides.. What though needs to be stressed and reflected upon more is in the way Italy stole it's criminals on the basis of false adjudgement to a court. This reflects the behavior and physche of a nation's government. You don't and cannot use wildcards every time. and this may not be the only incident that it may have to deal with. People & countries don't forget such acts of deceit so easily.

On the economic side, India is slated to be a much bigger market than Italy over next 2 decades. Best of economic predictions make Italy look like pigmy on that count as the future reveals itself.. Italy's government therefore is not acting in the interest of it's own nation.

He definitely did not waive his diplomatic immunity by becoming involved. Article 32 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations is clear that waiver must be express, and must be by the sending state. Immunity may be waived by initiating proceedings, but only against a direct counterclaim. The Italian ambassador did not initiate any proceedings, and even if had initiated these proceedings his detention is not a result of a counterclaim.

Strict compliance with the Vienna Convention is pretty much a condition precedent to the maintenance of diplomatic relations and the exchange of diplomats. I have been very surprised that there hasn't been a much stronger response to such a serious breach. When I first heard it had happened I half expected at least the entire EU to recall their ambassadors, if not withdraw all their diplomatic staff and conduct diplomatic relations through Indian embassies.

To stick their neck out for an ambassador who willfully lied to the Indian Supreme Court? My guess is that most EU countries are not very happy with Italy at the moment as this will probably complicate future issues with other EU countries when the Indian Supreme Court needs the word of an ambassador.

Don't worry, Daniele Mancini will be sent packing on the 3rd of April.

Agreed. Perhaps the legal p.o.v is that a Court can say anything it likes about someone it has no jurisdiction over (e.g. an accredited diplomat) but a diplomatic breach only occurs when some concrete attempt to enforce an action against his body occurs. In other words, it's all just bluster on the part of the Supreme Court. The Govt. of India may be playing for time by pretending to enforce the Court Judgement to prevent the diplomat leaving so as to avoid ratcheting up to the next step- viz asking for the Ambassador's recall.
The Marines have a right to a speedy trial. Since the Govt. of India has not constituted the Special Federal Court which the Supreme Court demanded they set up to decide the matter of jurisdiction, the Italians could argue that the Indians put themselves in the wrong and that now the matter should be settled by the International Court. Furthermore, the Indians won't turn over evidence allowing Italy to assert jurisdiction to prosecute so the question arises whether the Human Rights of the Marines are being violated by reason of undue delay in bringing the prosecution.

So the fishermen who were killed had no "human rights"? Or European human rights are different from Indian human rights?
btw, the biggest question here is trust. How can sovereign government of Italy file an affidavit in the highest court of India and then refuse to honor it? This just sets a bad precedent. Governments don't lie , cheat and deceit overtly. This act by the Government of Italy (and hence Italians) in itself is reprehensible - whether or not India has jurisdiction to try Italian marines.
How should diplomatic relations between two countries be maintained when one party decides to dishonor sworn affidavits?

Certainly the fishermen had human rights. The Kerala Police and Courts did a good job in taking the killers into custody, gathering evidence and moving forward expeditiously with the trial. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court then stuck its oar in and said Kerala does not Jurisdiction, but some Special Court, which does not yet exist, can decide if India has jurisdiction. All this was sheer stupidity and nonsense. De facto, Kerala had jurisdiction and was doing well on its own. The Supreme Court could have taken up the matter on appeal. Instead they jumped in and then did nothing. They blame the Govt saying- no, you should have set up Special Court- but are they so ignorant that they think Govt. can do anything quickly? Supreme Court could have gone on with its idiocy for as long as it liked but they were so stupid they let the birds fly from the cage. Once back in Europe, the Marines can get protection under Human Rights Law which says that the Indian habit of keeping a fellow waiting for trial for ten years or twenty years or forty years IS AN ABUSE OF HUMAN RIGHTS. Any Human Rights lawyer worth his salt could easily defeat Govt. of India's worthless lawyers. In this case, since the boys were Marines, Italian Govt. had to take action- otherwise they would look bad if, instead, their Mummies and Daddies and Grannies went to the European Court of Human Rights on behalf of these two little bambinos.
I'll tell you how Italy can file an affidavit in Supreme Court and refuse to honour it- they employed a senior Supreme Court Lawyer who was as purely desi. What? You think Indian lawyers counsel honesty to their clients?
The Supreme Court of India messed up this case. Italian govt and Indian Govt may not have cared- but unfortunately any Terrorist or Illegal Immigrant in Europe can go running to European Court of Human Rights and thus escape extradition even for murder, rape or genocide. A turkish man, in UK, who killed an English girl in Turkey was able to evade extradition back to Turkey, though an illegal immigrant, by saying 'no, they will torture me! They won't respect my religion! etc, etc'
There is a lesson here. How can Indians carry on trusting a rotten Judicial system? The arguments Supreme Court and Attorney General are putting up are utterly without merit. The Americans have a saying about Indian diplomats 'you can get them to agree to something but you can't get them to agree as to what they have agreed to.' Indians may think they are being clever by deliberately misunderstanding plain and simple laws- but it makes us look fools and robs us of 'soft power' and credibility in International arenas.
Supreme Court created this mess and are now throwing a tantrum. This worthless Govt. is also putting on a nautanki show. Who does it impress?

....When I first heard it had happened I half expected at least the entire EU to recall their ambassadors, if not withdraw all their diplomatic staff and conduct diplomatic relations through Indian embassies....

I looked this up- European Court of Human Rights guarantees right to speedy trial and Supreme Court of India has explicitly said 'Center (i.e. Govt. of India) is dragging its feet in giving the Marines a speedy trial'. Since the Italian Ambassador is bound by Italian Law and since Italy is bound by E.U. Human Rights Law, he did not have the right to give any assurance that 2 European citizens, or people disembarking on European Soil, could be returned to a country whose Apex Court had itself stated that the Govt. of that country had denied the Marines a speedy trial by 'dragging its feet'.
How stupid is this Supreme Court? Do they not know anything about the Law? On what basis can they apply some medieval concept of 'standing bail in one's body' that too to a Diplomat? The Ambassador, even if he does not have Diplomatic immunity, still has Human Rights. You can't jail a person because some other person over whom he has no control has not turned up at Court.
The Supreme court & Attorney General have shamed India. Italians, too, are fools for consulting worthless Indian lawyers rather than taking their stand on Human Rights Law.

The poster you replied to did not say that the fishermen have no human rights, nor did the poster say that Indian human rights are different from European human rights. Neither topic was mentioned at all in the comment you replied to.

You rhetorically criticized claims that the original poster did not make or even imply, as part of an attempt to emotionalize the debate, to make people feel sorry for the fishermen who died, and to stir up righteous postcolonialist resentment by reframing the narrative in terms of "Europeans claiming a double standard of more expansive human rights for themselves than for Indians."

Since the original post does not actually contain any of the positions you ascribe to it in your rhetorical questions, you have merely set up a strawman and attacked it, without actually rationally responding to anything the original poster wrote.

"to stir up righteous postcolonialist resentment.." - who is now setting up the strawman. What makes you think Indians still have colonial hangover and why is this brought into this issue?
Italy went back on its promise which it should not have made in the first place. It just makes the whole country look insincere in its intenstions to get this issue resolved. And I am sure if the two fisherman where US citizens, Italy would give a grand farewell to the marines and forget about them. If the marines were from US,India would probably let the case happen in US - just saying.
Two men are dead and very soon everyone will forget about them. It's all Karma.

Violation of the Vienna convention has for a long time (at least 100 years) been considered an act of war. Alliance solidarity with Italy would be required
One of the selling points of EU is that European nations have greater influence in the world if they act together when experiencing outside pressure, that is, Italy have justified reasons to expect unlimited EU-alliance solidarity in case of an Indian act of war versus Italy via a breach of the Vienna treaty

Indians off course do not have human right. Unless, they are LCD TV owning Mumbai slum dweller on Oprah Winfrey’s show or Haj subsidy receiving Indian Muslims, who crossed Bangladesh border a year back.

If we say to hell with the Vienna Convention we must accept that any diplomat, anywhere in the world, is a hostage to be ransomed by the receiving state for whatever they want. If that is the basis of diplomatic relations, we just won't have diplomatic relations. How would you feel if the Indian Ambassador in Rome was detained in retaliation for the Italian marines being held?

I'm not familiar with the particular instrument. There is an instrument called a guarantee, which relates to making good financial loss. This isn't an example of that.

In any case, diplomatic immunity was not waived. If that makes any undertaking useless and unenforceable, complain to the person who accepted it. Assuming they were a judge, they should have known better. I suspect what was given was in the nature of an assurance, a statement about their intended future conduct. That may or may not have been a lie, but that does not excuse gross violations of international law.

That makes this discussion pointless, because this particular contract is main focus of the conjecture. Additionally your statement “..complain to the person who accepted it” proves that it was preplanned absconding. That equals an insinuation / deception. By guaranteeing the return Italian Marines, and later claiming his own diplomatic immunity, Mancini has extended his immunity to non-diplomats. The entire matter was a ploy by Italian Government.
Following your argument “…complain to the person who accepted it” can be used to solve 99% of the political disagreement which roils the World in defense / social / economic arena. How breathtakingly ingenious.

I don't think anyone seriously believe that the India Supreme Court will prosecute the ambassador. or hold him in contempt. On the 2nd of April, given that the marines stay in Italy, the SC will come to the only conclusion that India cannot rip the ambassador of his diplomatic immunity and he will be declared persona non grata. I think it's perfectly reasonable for the SC to demand that Daniele Mancini explains him self in front of the court. I mean if he wants to further worsen the diplomatic conflict he could always test the Indian resolve and go to the airport, I'm pretty sure India would not stop him. However it would just make things worse.

I guess this will have serious implications on diplomatic and trade relations with the two countries. Especially since it will be impossible for either country to take a step back. India has an election coming up in 2014 and the opposition will keep up the heat.

Italy have a lot of votes in the European Parliament and the European council of ministers (due to size) and Italy is actually a large net contributor to the EU budget (they have contributed more than the UK when you sum up the net contributions (EU definition) during the last 5 or 6 years) and Italy has actually made net contributions to the bailout packages for Spain, Greece, Ireland and Portugal
EU do need to get Italy to implement some tough and necessary reforms, that is Italy is in a good position to demand unlimited EU alliance solidarity in this India-Italian row

The inevitable outcome of this episode is to reinforce multiple perceptions. India is pushover and a soft state that can be punched blue only then it reacts. Italy and more specifically its politicians are deceitful and can't be trusted to keep their word. The courts in India are increasingly assertive but not always with judicial restraint. Perhaps these views are not correct but this avoidable action reaction sequence fuels such assumptions. TE deserves compliments for a nuanced coverage.

I believe it is necessary to show unlimited European Union Alliance solidarity with Italy.
Well, i have reasons for believing that, since Denmark is also having a row with India due to Denmarks refusal to extradict a danish citizen to India after the danish courts ruled it would be a violation of the European Human rights treaty, that is, a violation of one of the mandatory requirements for EU membership if Denmark extradicted a citisen to trial in India due to the risk of human rights violations in the Indian justice system

Seems to me that it would be fair to demand an immediate halt to the ongoing FTA negotiations between India and EU

It is worth remembering

India exports 18% of it's export to EU27, that is, EU27 is Indias largest export destination
EU27 is only exporting 2,6% of it's export to India (that is 8-th most important export destination) even though EU27 do have a slight trade balance surplus versus India

Seems to me that India have a greater need for EU27 compared to EU27's need for India
Worth remembering
The eurozone is having a current account surplus (0,9% of GDP)
India is having a current account deficit (between 4% to 5% of GDP, that is, worse than the US current account deficit)

What about the human rights of countless Indians killed by the firearms dropped by Mr. Holck?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niels_Holck
His motives behind smuggling firearms to India were to "help the local communities in India fight the oppression brought on them by their government". He admits to it all the charges in his book. And yet, Danish government went out of its way to protect a smuggler and a terrorist.

India isn't a European colony anymore, in case Europeans have forgotten.

I agree with you if you said this in 1950. Now world order and economy has changed in last sixty years. Time is over to be arrogant. I remember that EU was slapping sanctions against India after nuclear test in 90's but no one could dare it. At least five EU countries will be bankcrupt in next ten years and EU may disintegrate in 15 years. EU share in world GDP has shrunk in 60years and it will be half in next thirty years. Now time is to be realistic and be honest and respect developing countries. Remember, Asians will be buying EU assets in ten years otherwise EU can not survive.
Do you know that both marine stayed in guest house and not in jail, and you are talking about human rights.

I agree with you if you said this in 1950. Now world order and economy has changed in last sixty years. Time is over to be arrogant. I remember that EU was slapping sanctions against India after nuclear test in 90's but no one could dare it. At least five EU countries will be bankcrupt in next ten years and EU may disintegrate in 15 years. EU share in world GDP has shrunk in 60years and it will be half in next thirty years. Now time is to be realistic and be honest and respect developing countries. Remember, Asians will be buying EU assets in ten years otherwise EU can not survive.
Do you know that both marine stayed in guest house and not in jail, and you are talking about human rights.

Can you be anymore childish? Who needs who more? Really dude. You think countries behave like, "you pinched me..I will pinch you back" Do you even realize that EU is NOT a political union. You think the Brits, French and German give a damn about 2 Italian marines. So going by your logic, you are giving a free reign for chinese to use Italian fishermen for target practice?

India is having high inflation, declining growth, high current account deficits and is at risk at having it's credit rating downgraded to Junk

The eurozone on the other hand is having
1) A current account surplus (USA is having a deficit)
2) Low net public debt as percentage of gdp (that is, fiscal liabilities minus fiscal assets). The numbers for the eurozone is actually better than the ones for USA
3) Low budget deficiets (as a percentage of GDP for the eurozone)

India will find out one day that when you reach certain stages of economic development will future growth have to come from reforms improving productivity. India is having a very poor track record in implementing reforms.
I doubt that India will gain the economic size that India is dreaming about.
I actually have a lot more faith in Europe
Lots of reforms are being implemented to ensure improved competitiveness and healthy long term fiscal health projections
(for instance increasing retirement ages with living ages)

That Europe is having a strong future and that India is having big problems

India is for instance having a huge current account deficit (4% to 5% of GDP, that is worse than the US current account deficit)

A developing country can still be long term strong if it's current account deficit is due to import of advanced machinery used for building up it's manufacturing but it seems to me that Indias current account deficit to a large extent is due to import of energy and consumption

Simultaneously are India having a very bad track record of implementing public infrastructure investments

That is not good because the easiest part of developing a country is the growth phase were you can benefit from technology transfers and perform large scale infrastructure investments for high additional benefits

The difficult growth phases are when you arrive at the need for reforms to improve productivity in order to generate growth
India already have a very poor track record in implementing reforms and the ineffectiveness of Indias easy growth phases makes me believe it will be very difficult for india to reach it's economic potential

The Eurozone on the other hand are very good at implementing necessary but tough and painful reforms. The eurozone is actually much better at doing this compared to USA and China and both USA and China seems to be better at it compared to India

Numbers:
Most of European Countries will have negative GDP in future.
Developing countries will have positive GDP growth.
Result: Share of European GDP in world GDP will shrink in future.
Best solution: Live and Let Live

Well, for instance in Denmark have we during the last few years implemented reforms there is estimated to expand our labour force with 350000 until 2050 in a 5,5 million inhabitant population
(phasing out early retirement, making it more difficult to obtain disability retirement, automatic increases in retirement age with living age, halving of time length for unemployment benefit, reductings in future cpi adjustment of social transfer,....)
Additionally have we reprioritized public funds to finance tax cuts and increase infrastructure investments, science and education investments.
sounds to me that there are good long term growth prospects and lots of other european countries are doing something similar

Regarding China
Their one child policy means that their labour force has max size last year / this year. It will continue to fall as far as the eye can see
right now have the 5 persons in the labour force for every 1 person on retirement. In 2030 will it be 2 in the labour force for every 1 person on retirement

Regarding India
Well, currently are they going through the easy grow phases but according to this weeks economist:

GDP Growth: 6,5%
CPI: 8,8%
That is, consumer prices increase 2,3%-point faster than GDP, that is, negative GDP growth
Worth noticing they are saying 4,1% current account deficit, 5% budget deficit and interest rates of 7,9% on 10 year government bonds.
That sounds as a country there is going down

Unemployment rates are not worth comparing because they are calculated in very different ways in different countries
It is more interesting to compare the size of the labour force as percentage of the population and the percentage of the population there is having a job

There is also huge difference from your numbers to those presented in this weeks economist

For instance
Current account

Eurozone expected to have a surplus of 1,2% of GDP (when i checked a month ago was it just 0,9%)
Italy expected to have a current account deficit of 0,7%
India on the other hand expected to have a current account deficit of 4,1%

For India, 5% GDP growth rate in 2012-13 and 6.5% growth rate in previous financial year take into account the prevailing inflation rates. We have a concept of Nominal growth rate (at current prices) of GDP that runs into 13-15% range. You are grossly mistaken in your economic interpretations. World is not a fool to eulogize Indian growth story for no reason.

Nevertheless, those numbers does not frighten me since india is running with current account deficits and national budget deficits and going through the early easy growth stages were it is easy to generate growth via technology transfers and infrastructure investments

Deficit financing is a well established concept for countries growing fast. If India keeps its fiscal deficit in 3-4% range (which is slightly off limit at 5.2%) then it is not going to do much harm rather it is beneficial. Overall external debt is still within comfort zone. If growth rate is good then there is no harm in borrowing as it results in value creation. Problems will arise only if growth falters which is not expected to happen in near future and economic policy everywhere runs on the forecasts. Technology transfer is a facade, no one transfers marketable technology. Infrastructure investments too do not come out of blue, they need to be financed (even if it is by deficit financing - if you can afford).
As far as current account deficit is concerned, recent problem is more of a creation of high dependence on crude oil and a habit to buy more and more gold. Out of these, second is not a bad thing in my opinion and first one is major concern. But India has relatively large forex reserve (at $290 bn) so she is, but not much, bothered about Current account deficit.
Point is that India has problems but they are not related to economics. Problems are more on the social fronts such as utilization of demographic dividend, skill development, improved governance and inclusiveness of growth. But India will re-emerge by sheer force of its youthful middle class - whose energy is visible all over place.
Let no one take us for granted.

Well, deficit spending on infrastucture is basically conversion of capital (money) into another type of capital (physical)
That can be very good if the infrastructure improve the mobility of the labour force and company transportation
Well, deficit spending on research and science is basically conversion of capital (money) into other types of capital (human, intellectual property / new products)
That can also have very good long term effects;

Europe have implemented lots of reforms there aims to reprioritize public spending by reducing spending on social transfers and instead spend it on investment in infrastructure, science, education,...

India on the other hand is spending lots of public money on subsidizing energy imports, that is increasing consumption of products there have negative consequences for the current account balance.

Foreign currency reserve can vaporize very fast if it is due to inflow of speculation money and investment money. Speculative / investment money can very fast reverse course and leave a country

Well, as far as i can see did the italians not have the willpower to take a fight about is.

You can see the same in NATO
Some countries (like Denmark) are always sending troops and some countries (like Italy) never send troops for international missions. That is, some countries are prepared to take a fight for what they believe in.

Regarding EU
If you as a country want to see EU do something do you have to burn a lot of political capital in coalition building were you have to give concessions in other areas.
I am sure Italy could have obtained support for a price like "more necessary but unpopular reforms to the Italian economy"
It is a lot easier to block something in EU since that requires much fewer votes but you also burn political capitol doing that even though that cost can be mitigated by having a good case.

Reforms in Europe are welcome, if at all they are taking place. And who said subsidy is (always) evil for financial health?

You are mistaken about the nature of foreign currency reserves in India. Speculative money has only a small stake in it. Also, speculative money is here because growth is here - and money flows where ever it can provide better returns. So what makes you think that it will reverse its course, of course my argument is predicated upon the fact that India manages its growth in next decade or so. Secondly, do you think it is easy for anyone to take away investments without loosing out themselves? So why will anyone take suicidal path?

I am not saying that we do not need to improve our exports and minimize dependence on imported fuel. However, these will happen in due course as we strengthen our demographic dividend steadily. Overall, India is positive and world is positive about India. You need not worry excessively about that. India knows what she needs to do.

There are lot of historical examples were countries have run current account deficits. They have a tendency to run into sudden confidence crisis situations like the asian financial crisis in 1997

There is also a tendency, that investors begin to worry about a country's economy at much lower debt levels as percentage of GDP if the country have a current account deficit, that is, basically borrow from foreigners instead of borrowing from the savings of it's own citizens

Regarding reforms
Europe has kind of gone reform crazy with lots of tough and unpopular but necessary reforms to improve competiveness, long term fiscal health and financial stability
Large part of the world outside europe has not yet realised it but a lot is happening in Europe

You are viewing economy as a zero sum game, which is not exactly the case. If Europe is on reform path it will be good for everybody. Europe's competitiveness, financial stability and fiscal health will benefit everybody, particularly India (due to inherent complementarity of these economies).

But Italy and Denmark are not whole of Europe and India does not have any grudge against any country. Conflict with these nations is more on the philosophical level, equality of importance of human lives, wherever they may be living, and human rights.

Probably you don't know that India's domestic savings (30%+ of GDP) are second only to that of China. So in large part Indian growth story is domestic savings driven. We still have restrictions on FDI in many areas and western countries (US in particular) are clamoring to get them opened. To suggest that India may get into a situation like Asian financial crisis of 1997 is an overreach, specially if this insinuation is based on widening Current account deficit only.
You are mixing fiscal deficit with current account deficit - which is like comparing drought with earthquake just because both cause calamity. Interrelation between total debt level (as % of GDP) and current account deficit is not so much simplistic.